Francesca Filippi1, Fabio Martinelli2, Alessio Paffoni1, Marco Reschini1, Francesco Raspagliesi2, Edgardo Somigliana3,4,5. 1. Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy. 2. Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy. 3. Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy. dadosomigliana@yahoo.it. 4. Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy. dadosomigliana@yahoo.it. 5. Fondazione Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico - Infertility Unit, Via Fanti 6, 20122, Milan, Italy. dadosomigliana@yahoo.it.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the capacity of random antral follicle count (AFC), i.e., AFC recorded at any time during the menstrual cycle, to predict the number of retrieved mature oocytes in women with malignancies undergoing random start ovarian hyperstimulation METHODS: A consecutive series of 72 women with malignancies who underwent ovarian hyperstimulation aimed at egg freezing between July 2014 and December 2016 was retrospectively reviewed. A standardized random start protocol was used for all women. AFC and serum AMH were systematically assessed prior to initiating ovarian hyperstimulation. The main outcome was the retrieval of ≥ 10 mature oocytes. The accuracy of random AFC was tested with the c-statistics (area under the ROC curve). RESULTS: For the whole cohort, the c-statistics for the prediction of ≥ 10 mature oocytes using AFC and serum AMH were similar. Specifically, the areas under the curve were 0.76 (95%CI 0.66-0.87) and 0.82 (95%CI 0.72-0.92), respectively (p = ns). Moreover, when considering the subgroup of women recruited after day 5 of the cycle (proper random start, n = 52), the areas under the curve did not also differ. Specifically, they resulted in 0.77 (95%CI 0.64-0.89) and 0.83 (95%CI 0.72-0.95), respectively (p = ns). CONCLUSIONS: AFC collected at any time during the menstrual cycle can provide valuable information for the counseling of women with malignancies scheduled for oocyte cryopreservation. Its reliability appears to be non-inferior to that of serum AMH.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the capacity of random antral follicle count (AFC), i.e., AFC recorded at any time during the menstrual cycle, to predict the number of retrieved mature oocytes in women with malignancies undergoing random start ovarian hyperstimulation METHODS: A consecutive series of 72 women with malignancies who underwent ovarian hyperstimulation aimed at egg freezing between July 2014 and December 2016 was retrospectively reviewed. A standardized random start protocol was used for all women. AFC and serum AMH were systematically assessed prior to initiating ovarian hyperstimulation. The main outcome was the retrieval of ≥ 10 mature oocytes. The accuracy of random AFC was tested with the c-statistics (area under the ROC curve). RESULTS: For the whole cohort, the c-statistics for the prediction of ≥ 10 mature oocytes using AFC and serum AMH were similar. Specifically, the areas under the curve were 0.76 (95%CI 0.66-0.87) and 0.82 (95%CI 0.72-0.92), respectively (p = ns). Moreover, when considering the subgroup of women recruited after day 5 of the cycle (proper random start, n = 52), the areas under the curve did not also differ. Specifically, they resulted in 0.77 (95%CI 0.64-0.89) and 0.83 (95%CI 0.72-0.95), respectively (p = ns). CONCLUSIONS: AFC collected at any time during the menstrual cycle can provide valuable information for the counseling of women with malignancies scheduled for oocyte cryopreservation. Its reliability appears to be non-inferior to that of serum AMH.
Entities:
Keywords:
AMH; Antral follicle count; Fertility preservation; Oocyte; Random start
Authors: Patrick M Bossuyt; Johannes B Reitsma; David E Bruns; Constantine A Gatsonis; Paul P Glasziou; Les M Irwig; David Moher; Drummond Rennie; Henrica C W de Vet; Jeroen G Lijmer Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-01-07 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Frank J M Broekmans; Dominique de Ziegler; Colin M Howles; Alain Gougeon; Geoffrey Trew; Francois Olivennes Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2009-07-08 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Laura Rienzi; Ana Cobo; Alessio Paffoni; Claudia Scarduelli; Antonio Capalbo; Gábor Vajta; José Remohí; Guido Ragni; Filippo Maria Ubaldi Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2012-03-22 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Sanghoon Lee; Sinan Ozkavukcu; Elke Heytens; Fred Moy; Rose M Alappat; Kutluk Oktay Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2011-05-04 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Monika L Metzger; Lillian R Meacham; Briana Patterson; Jacqueline S Casillas; Louis S Constine; Nobuko Hijiya; Lisa B Kenney; Marcia Leonard; Barbara A Lockart; Wendy Likes; Daniel M Green Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-02-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J van Disseldorp; C B Lambalk; J Kwee; C W N Looman; M J C Eijkemans; B C Fauser; F J Broekmans Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2009-10-19 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: A La Marca; G Sighinolfi; D Radi; C Argento; E Baraldi; A Carducci Artenisio; G Stabile; A Volpe Journal: Hum Reprod Update Date: 2009-09-30 Impact factor: 15.610
Authors: Simone L Broer; Jeroen van Disseldorp; Kimiko A Broeze; Madeleine Dolleman; Brent C Opmeer; Patrick Bossuyt; Marinus J C Eijkemans; Ben-Willem J Mol; Frank J M Broekmans Journal: Hum Reprod Update Date: 2012-11-27 Impact factor: 15.610